From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

A. W. v. Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs.

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
May 11, 2018
NO. 03-17-00886-CV (Tex. App. May. 11, 2018)

Opinion

NO. 03-17-00886-CV

05-11-2018

A. W., Appellant v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee


FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 146TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
NO. 285,033-B, THE HONORABLE JACK WELDON JONES, JUDGE PRESIDING MEMORANDUM OPINION

A.W. appeals from the trial court's order terminating her parental rights to her minor child, A.C. See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.206(a); see also id. § 161.001. Following a termination hearing, the trial court found by clear and convincing evidence that A.W. had executed an irrevocable affidavit for voluntary relinquishment of parental rights and that termination was in the child's best interest. See id. §§ 161.001 (b)(1)(K), (2), 161.003.

We refer to the mother and her child by their initials only. See Tex. Fam. Code § 109.002(d); Tex. R. App. P. 9.8.

On appeal, A.W.'s court-appointed attorney has filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967); Taylor v. Texas Dep't of Protective & Regulatory Servs., 160 S.W.3d 641, 646-47 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, pet. denied) (applying Anders procedure in appeal from termination of parental rights). The brief meets the requirements of Anders by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced on appeal. See 386 U.S. at 744; Taylor, 160 S.W.3d at 646-47. A.W.'s counsel has certified to this Court that he provided A.W. with a copy of the Anders brief, informed her of her right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response or brief, and provided a motion to assist appellant in obtaining the record. A.W. did not file a motion requesting access to the record, and, to date, has not filed a pro se response or brief.

The Department filed a response to the Anders brief, which indicated that it agreed that the appeal is frivolous and without merit.

Upon receiving an Anders brief, we must conduct a full examination of all of the proceedings to determine whether the appeal is wholly frivolous. Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988); Anders, 386 U.S. at 744. We have reviewed the entire record, including the Anders brief submitted on A.W.'s behalf, and have found nothing that would arguably support an appeal. We agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order terminating A.W.'s parental rights.

/s/_________

Cindy Olson Bourland, Justice Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Bourland Affirmed Filed: May 11, 2018


Summaries of

A. W. v. Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs.

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
May 11, 2018
NO. 03-17-00886-CV (Tex. App. May. 11, 2018)
Case details for

A. W. v. Tex. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs.

Case Details

Full title:A. W., Appellant v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services…

Court:TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

Date published: May 11, 2018

Citations

NO. 03-17-00886-CV (Tex. App. May. 11, 2018)